So… is this art or vandalism? (picture content)

Home Forum Chat Forum So… is this art or vandalism? (picture content)

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 40 total)
  • So… is this art or vandalism? (picture content)
  • psychle
    Member

    Riding around the industrial wasteland of Lee Valley today, stumbled across what I considered a bit of a treasure trove of urban art… what do you reckon? Is this Art or Vandalism?









    [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3273931997_3cec73eda9.jpg?v=0[/img]

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber
    joe1983
    Member

    +1, except for the last one of the fat cat

    psychle
    Member

    The girl with the flower really blew me away, the level of detail in it is really something… the picture doesn’t give it full justice πŸ™‚

    jedi
    Member

    deffo art

    theboy
    Member

    depends on whether you own the property, or if you are an impartial viewer.

    I like it though. even the Alice in Wonderland cat.

    MikeT-23
    Member

    If it’s an industrial wasteland (the implication that it’s full of eyesores) then perhaps these images provide some sort of relief. They certainly look like someone has put a lot of thought and effort into them.
    They’re also, to me, more absorbing and engaging than, say, tags which suggest a territorial claim over the space, and by extension have a more sinister and threatening effect.

    It’s a fine line though, isn’t it? Some tag work can appear to be very elaborate and considered, and therefore ‘arty’.

    I would say that vandalism is more associated with destruction. These images you’ve posted are creative. Sure, they are ‘damaging’ the finish of the building, but if the buildings are rundown anyway, their fabric needs more attention than just a full coat of fresh paint, eh?

    That said, though, I’m not so keen on the last two images, and if the ‘artists’ tried out their work on my gable-end, ….. grrrr

    mudshark
    Member

    What is art? The answer is that the images are probably both art and vandalism.

    duntmatter
    Member

    [chinstroke mode]Is not London itself art?[chinstroke mode]

    Trimix
    Member

    If its done on your property then its vandalism.

    They could be both, they could be neither, it depends on the viewer.

    I think they look badass and I think you must be a bit of a square if you would prefer to look at a plain brick wall over a colourful picture

    mudshark
    Member

    it depends on the viewer.

    Well, IMO whilst beauty is in the eye of the beholder, art is in the mind of the creator. Discuss…. πŸ˜‰

    izakimak
    Member

    Definatly art if it is not just a scruffy tag, there’s an underpass near me which is often covered in scruffy tags and it must cost the council a fortune to keep cleaning it, i personally think they should allow someone to do a proper mural in it and then see if it gets left alone by the others, if it does good, if not nothing lost.

    RudeBoy
    Member

    If its done on your property then its vandalism.

    Hmm. Some might say that ‘property is theft’…

    That above, that’s art. The second one down, I love that. I had a chat with a couple of blokes doing stuff just next to that, a few days ago. There’s some really brilliant stuff down there.

    Psychle; you up for an urban graffiti bikey sometime?

    Has Mamadirt seen these? She’s into graffiti and that, from what I can tell.

    psychle
    Member

    Hey rudeboy, good to see you’re up late πŸ™‚ I’m a tad intoxicated (had a work do tonight, free booze, it’ve been rude not to indulge πŸ™‚ ) Anyhoo… definitely up for a ride with you mate, drop me an email at simonATintrepidtravelDOTcom and we’ll sort out a sortie into the urban jungle that is London πŸ™‚

    psychle
    Member

    Oh,and because of my work drinks I missed out on an ebay auction I was hanging out for… ended up going for well under what I was willing to pay, grrrrrr πŸ‘Ώ

    Filthy
    Member

    Banksy

    Loads of good stuff here

    psychle
    Member

    yeah, but banksy is so per se πŸ™‚ over inflated self promoter… I prefer the humble anonymous folk who just do it for the sake of it πŸ™‚

    lard
    Member

    yeah, but banksy is so per se [:)] over inflated self promoter

    passe?

    Rochey
    Member

    A+ Art all the way, I also like the girls with the flower but I also love the first one.

    Premier Icon ourmaninthenorth
    Subscriber

    yeah, but banksy is so per se [:)] over inflated self promoter

    passe?

    PassΓ©, even?

    The top two items, I might consider as art, but the rest are simply exterior decoration: an expression of technical ability without any apparent reason for their being does not make something art.

    Art and vandalism can easily co-exist and be one and the same thing. Art doesn’t only happen in galleries or in books….

    GNARGNAR
    Member

    Would the people who say “if you own the property it’s vandalism” still have the same opinion if it was Banksy himslef who had adorned your gable in the middle of the night and in the process made it rare and extremely valuable?

    donald
    Member

    The girl with the flower is trite.

    I quite like the first one. [waves glasses in a circular motion]

    acjim
    Member

    1st one is great as is the boy with the turban. The others are well executed but cliched. Better than nothing though!

    coffeeking
    Member

    It might be art, and they might be technically very good, but they’re uninvited and technically illegal. If someone did it to my garage wall I’d want to break their face, regardless of how good it was.

    psychle
    Member

    The girl with the flower is trite.

    I guess it is a little, but the technical skill is very good (this is a 8-10ft tall painting btw!)

    Personally I like the 1st one the most, closely followed by the Screaming Man: I’ve tweaked these in PS a bit to improve the contrast and black point, so I take a little credit for the finished photographic image πŸ˜‰ Plus with the first one, I deliberately shot it on an angle to include the foliage, I think this helps with the overall image?) See, I’m an artist me πŸ™‚

    acjim
    Member

    but if everyone’s garage walls were so nicely decorated wouldn’t life be colourful!

    psychle
    Member

    It might be art, and they might be technically very good, but they’re uninvited and technically illegal.

    This is on the back of a disused warehouse in the Lee Valley, so it’s not causing any real harm. It’d be a different matter if it was someone’s house I suppose, though personally I might not mind something of this quality on my garage wall, maybe…

    Michael B
    Member

    Definitely art for me but the problem lot of it out there isn’t and tagging isn’t

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    First one interesting, quite like the second one, bit Francis Bacon-y.

    Cat one is nice and cheerful.

    Probably makes the lower end of the Lea Valley look less grotty, to be honest.

    simonfbarnes
    Member

    If someone did it to my garage wall I’d want to break their face

    that is a good deal more criminal

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    got a whole road like this in Brighton;

    RudeBoy
    Member

    If someone did it to my garage wall I’d want to break their face, regardless of how good it was.

    You’d resort to extreme violence, just because someone graffitied your garage wall?

    What I’ve seen, of the proper artists’ stuff, and what I’ve learned from talking to a few of them, is that they try to stick to abandoned warehouses, railway bridges etc- somewhere where he ‘vandalism’ impact is very little. The people who do the kind of stuff above, are actually mostly very conscientious, and even try to get permission from the property owners, sometimes. I know some that actually get paid to do stuff on shop fronts etc.

    It’s the casual taggers, that just scribbly their inane street name everywhere, that drag it down, the same as selfish, careless cyclists drag us all down.

    Can’t see any problem with someone covering up a boring grey motorway support with something colourful and imaginative.

    traildog
    Member

    Art can be vandalism and vandalism can be art. The two aren’t mutually exclusive of each other.

    mudshark
    Member

    Art has to be intentional so therefore this is art, assuming the creator sees it that way, but also vandalism.

    barca
    Member

    From the other side of the fence, even when somebody has been invited and paid to do it on somebody’s wall, it can be vandalism. Enter stage left the monstrosity on the wall of North West Mountain Bikes in Stockport.
    Dearie me…..

    roper
    Member

    Is it art?

    RudeBoy
    Member

    Dunno, Roper; can’t see anything!

    roper
    Member

    Oh, link didn’t work
    Still could have been worse.
    (as you may know) πŸ™‚

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 40 total)

The topic ‘So… is this art or vandalism? (picture content)’ is closed to new replies.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks are open.

Skip to top